"Nightbitch" is nothing new. Spoilers

I saw “Nightbitch” at the 2024 Vancouver International Film Festival, where it only received one screening, which of course ended up being sold out. There was a lot of buzz around Amy Adams newest film, which many were predicting would garner the actress her first Oscar win. And the premise, which is about a stay-at-home mother who is also an artist who becomes overwhelmed with the pressures of motherhood and begins acting like a dog, also had many people buzzing for it's uniqueness and originality.

I will start by stating that I have not read the novel which the film is based on, written by Rachel Yoder and published in 2021, nor had I previously known of it's existence. That doesn't mean that when I heard about director Marielle Heller's newest release it didn't strike me as immediately familiar. Indeed, the first thing that came to mind, both when I saw the title of the film and read the synopsis, was a little-known film that I recalled watching at that same festival back in 2017:

This original film, which starred Marianna Palka (who is also the writer and director), and Jason Ritter, seems to have gone completely under the radar for most people. Which is a terrible shame, not only because both Palka and Ritter give incredible performances in it, but because it also explores the exact same themes present in “Nightbitch." The 2017 film “Bitch” is about an overworked and overwhelmed housewife (who also happens to be an artist), who is finally pushed to the brink by her ungrateful and unappreciative family and has a mental breakdown where she starts acting like a vicious, angry dog, and very realistically I might add.

Of course, there are some stark differences. The largest one being that Jason Ritter, who plays the husband, ends up playing a much more prominent role than Marianna's housewife, due in large part to her acting like a literal dog through most of the film. And the husband in “Bitch” is much more of a philandering jerk than Amy Adam's husband in “Nightbitch.” The other big difference is that Marianna Palka's dog transformation is entirely psychological, which not only calls for a more interesting acting performance from Palka (in my opinion at least) but also makes for a story that's a little easier to comprehend and swallow.

Amy Adam's transformation in “Nightbitch” appears to be mostly physical and happens more gradually. While she does display some behavioral characteristics, they mostly consist of her playfully dog acting with her toddler son, or in moments of frustration barking like a dog in the exact way you would expect a human to sound when imitating barking like a dog. And as far as the physical transformation goes, it's not always easy to understand what's going on. At first, Adams begins to notice little things like a long hair growing off her chin, or finds extra nipples growing on her belly. Then we start to see scenes where a full-fledged dog, presumably meant to be Adams (although we never see her fully transform) running around at night with stray dogs in the neighborhood. While watching these scenes, I wasn't entirely sure if we were to understand that Adams had fully transformed at this point, or if the dog was supposed to be a metaphorical stand-in for the actual human Adams because the director didn't want to make the actress go into full-out dog mode.

To add to my confusion of what's actually going on with Adam's transformation, after her first all-night run with the stray dogs when she comes home to shower, her husband gets turned on by the sight of her showering off the mud. Now, Adams obviously didn't want to appear fully naked in the film, so we never see her full body in this scene. But this just left me wondering: what happened to the extra nipples we saw on her body earlier? Have they now fully disappeared at this point? And if not, why is her husband making no mention of them? Is her transformation into a dog slow but the transformation back into a human quick?

But putting aside my puzzlement about what's actually going on with Adams dog transformation in “Nightbitch," that's not the only thing that rubbed me the wrong way about the film. Even if you put aside the fact that the whole “stressed out stay-at-home mom turns into a dog” premise has already been done, I still don't think the film has anything new to say, and it seems to very much believe that it does. I feel like it's been common knowledge for quite some time now that being a stay-at-home mom can be very challenging. Ever since the idea that women weren't fully satisfied being housewives was introduced in Betty Friedan's book “The Feminine Mystique” back in 1963, this is a theme that has been explored multiple times. Especially in movies, although it might not have always been the in the very on-the-nose way “Nightbitch” explores it. In fact, it has been so engrained in the last few generations that there are now “trad wives” on social media platforms that are trying to turn the tide and make it look more appealing again.

It's possible the story, as written in Rachel Yoder's book, has more nuance. Or at the very least, what's actually going on with the main character's transformation is made a bit more clear. I welcome any thoughts and clarifications anybody is willing to share, especially regarding the latter. I do think Amy Adams, given how under recognized she's become in recent years, did a very good job with the material she was given. And at times her performance did involve feels of emotion in me, especially when she confronted her husband about his willingness to let her give up her artistic dreams.

In any case, whether or not you are a fan of “Nightbitch,” I hope you will at least consider looking up Marianna Palka's 2017 film. Not only is she an even more criminally under-recognized actress, but it seems like just as big of a crime for her film to disappear into oblivion while another film with near identical themes gets all of the glory.